Could it get any worse for Romney: Polls show him down 10 points, GOP playing dead

[rareboy]

I used to watch Tim and Tammy Faye Bakker on PTL because it was such a freak show.....but I have to say that I only watch the 700 Club whenever there is a huge disaster in order to hear how they are going to blame it on the homos.

 

[chance1]

Same reason I used to force myself to watch the 700 Club. It's important to know what the other side is thinking. Let me say this, it's like living on Mars over there on Fox News, it's such an alternate reality. No WONDER their viewers are convinced that the American public is three steps away from storming the front gates of the White House!

interesting - u claim that O'Reilly isn't half bad and Greta wasn't bad yet you compare Fox to the 700 Club

doesn't make sense Luv

other than Hannity ........ what's the problem?

If you watch MSNBC (I do) and Fox (I do but less so), not sure how you can make an unfair comment about "storming the front gates"

Did you see Ed Schultz last night? he's as bad or worse than Sean - he just sells the opposite side of the coin

it's just hyperbole not based on reality and it's not a Fox thing but rather a partisan thing

 

[LuvFindsAndyHardy]

I got my scissors and my glue so NO GUFF about it, Mister! (Besides, you secretly LOVE it!)

interesting - u claim that O'Reilly isn't half bad and Greta wasn't bad yet you compare Fox to the 700 Club

I claim I don't mind O'REILLY. I don't agree with O'Reilly, but he's a smart guy and I enjoy him. I didn't say Greta wasn't half bad because, quite frankly, I think she is. It wasn't me that thought she is a closet liberal because I think nothing of the kind. I was not comparing FOX to the 700 Club in terms of style, just in that they are both things I force myself to watch to take the occasional pulse of the "other side."

other than Hannity ........ what's the problem?

I'll grant you, it's MOSTLY Hannity but, at least with Hannity, there are no illusions and you know where you stand. I have a real problem with Greta because she APPEARS so middle of the road while saying such partisan things that unwary viewers might actually be fooled into thinking she's being balanced. To me, that's more dangerous. **

If you watch MSNBC (I do) and Fox (I do but less so), not sure how you can make an unfair comment about "storming the front gates"

Well, you've already labelled the comment "unfair" so now I have to fight back from a defensive position but what I meant was that spending the evening in the FOX camp you really get the sense that the country is whipped into a hysteria of hatred for the president and revolution is just a t-shirt away. This is why people who primarily watch FOX News look at you like you have two heads when you just "don't get it."

Did you see Ed Schultz last night? he's as bad or worse than Sean - he just sells the opposite side of the coin

I dislike Ed Schultz so I never watch him anymore.

it's just hyperbole not based on reality and it's not a Fox thing but rather a partisan thing

If it was just Schultz vs Hannity I would agree with you 100% but throw in the rest of it (especially the calm reasoned partisanship masquerading as something else, a la Van Sustern) and it's a....well, what's a broadcast cable news version of a meme?

EDIT: ** for example Greta broached the subject of Mitt releasing his tax returns, but she did it as a softball to Reince Prebus (yuck!) just so that he could easily shoot the notion down and return to his Obama hates the American dream talking points. She just let it go. It was a setup.

 

[opinterph]

Rasmussen is very clear that he attempts to sample probable voters rather than merely registered voters.

Rasmussen weights its poll results to adjust for “age, race, gender, political party, and other factors.”

Rasmussen Reports determines its partisan weighting targets through a dynamic weighting system that takes into account the state’s voting history, national trends, and recent polling in a particular state or geographic area.


For political surveys, census bureau data provides a starting point and a series of screening questions are used to determine likely voters. The questions involve voting history, interest in the current campaign, and likely voting intentions.

Methodology - Rasmussen Reports™

No. [Rasmussen] ask more republicans over democrats.

Jonathan Chait attributes the format of the questions he asks for Rasmussen’s tendency to produce poll results that skew toward the conservative position. (2010)

The Rasmussen Problem | The New Republic

In the 1950s, Paul Perry, the legendary president of the Gallup Organization, combined seven questions … into an index. The greater respondents score on the index, the greater the probability that they would vote.

… That procedure proved to produce more accurate election forecasts than alternatives they tested, and remains the basic concept still used in the Gallup likely voter model to this day.

'Likely' Voters: How Pollsters Define And Choose Them (2010)

 

[rareboy]

It's obvious you just made this up. No. They ask more republicans over democrats. It's not a balanced poll at all, and it still doesn't give your man any lead. You should be very afraid. And your assertion that republicans are more likely to say how they'll vote is not a true one either... especially not in a general election.



He is a definite partisan. And it's a very flawed method. Still gives Obama the lead in various swing states though... so that's gotta burn.

It is like even Rasmussen couldn't think up a way to spin this. I'll bet the RNC is furious.

 

[frankfrank]

Sorry guys, its over.

Debate is over, you can start apologizing in this thread if you like.

**DO NOT BECOME COMPLACENT IN ALL OF THIS!!** Consider, also, that Republican-led laws at voter suppression, which are being legislated for the **SOLE** purpose of making it easiest for Republicans to vote, will give Democrats possibly a 2% or more handicap in a lot of states. There is no place for complacency this year, if we value our (what Republicans like to call a) "lifestyle" at all. It is their desire to return gay rights to what they were in 1952, and Romney's nominations for any Supreme Court vacancies (and incredibly stringent litmus tests for a Republican Senate confirmation vote) will guarantee the abolishment of gay rights until beyond the lifetime of the youngest JUB members. Get the Republicans in charge, and it's highly probable that people will again be warehoused in prisons for sodomy even before 2020 arrives. Count on it. They HATE you.

Even Benvolio, below, admits that complacency among Democratic voters may well result in all-around Republican victories.
This one cannot be lost.

Sorry you could not understand it. The danger for Democrats of polls and media support is the their base will think the election is in the bag, so why bestir themselves to vote.